Nintendo Direct on February 13 2019

[Slumber]

5 hours ago, Glennstavos said:

I thought FemShep was one of gaming's best protagonists. Male Shepard is just meme bait.

FemShep and MaleShep share like, 99% of their dialogue. It's mostly down to their line reads.

As much as people like Renegade FemShep, I've always hated Jennifer Hale's "Edgy" delivery for those choices, and can never take Renegade FemShep seriously because of it.

Edited February 12, 2019 by Slumber

[lez_rhajat]

I love dating and S supports. I want that in the new game but without children units. That plot made very little sense in Fates. But I love the human element of supports and relationship building. This would be the best of both worlds.

[Flying Shogi]

I wouldn't be surprised if they announced a release date in this direct. It's slated for a spring 2019 release and it's already February so I can see them announcing it soon and have the period in between for promotion pages in Japanese game magazines. 

[Ertrick36]

4 hours ago, Hekselka said:

Yeah it doesn't really bother me either. Was just curious if you also thought about it.

And yeah that whole letter Mikoto left is something I never liked because it lessened the point of fates and the character of the Hoshido siblings.

Yup. I will never understand how Bioware thought that was a good idea when they were making the game.

- Generally speaking, I just don't care about romance in video games beyond the simple "I could see these two getting together".  It's just never written in ways I like.  Always soppy, and doesn't often follow up the story beyond the initial hookup.  It's to the point where I actually prefer seeing disaster marriages like Micheal Townley's in GTA V.  Though I'm also in a weird position where I don't really want to see this regressed back down to how it was in the GBA games or even the Archanea games because as poorly written as the romance seems to typically be in my eyes I still like the idea of forming such close bonds being an integral part of the gameplay - one of the few instances in games where the gameplay is woven into the narrative to some capacity.

- Definitely the heart of that issue.  It really diminished their side of things.  I still prefer the Birthright story because it's not about Corrin enabling his slave masters to murder scores of innocent people and then later holding a pity party, but the Hoshidan siblings went from legitimate flesh and blood siblings to just some acquaintances who aren't fighting for a horrible king when I learned of their true relation to Corrin (which wasn't through the letter, btw; I think it was just spoiled for me).

- I feel it had to do with a shift in the writing team.  Usually when a writing direction goes bad, it's either because the grunts are treated like crap (happened to Telltale games) or they get an entirely different writing team (Spongebob in later seasons).  I have to imagine the writers just didn't know anything about Shepard and figured "well, what would make a hardened, grizzled soldier upset?  Of course, seeing a child die!".  And I would suggest this because I know the previous writers had an entirely different ending planned - something to do with dark energy - but then we got new writers who gave us the ending we actually got in ME3.

3 hours ago, Shrimperor said:

If i have 1 wish...

No dragon or dragon controlled final boss, please.

I personally wouldn't mind if they did the latter in the form of a character similar to Julius in Genealogy.  Though that may just be my bias for Genealogy's story-telling speaking.  I know that approach also resulted in the awful main antagonists we got in Fates.

2 hours ago, Slumber said:

FemShep and MaleShep share like, 99% of their dialogue. It's mostly down to their line reads.

As much as people like Renegade FemShep, I've always hated Jennifer Hale's "Edgy" delivery for those choices, and can never take Renegade FemShep seriously because of it.

It's down to a few things besides voice work.

One is how we'd see a female in that role as opposed to a male.  Many - including myself - simply find female characters in these roles more interesting, even if they act the same way.  I'm more interested in stories that follow female soldiers than those that follow male soldiers because the latter has already been done to death and I myself am a male and want to see stories about people that are less like me.  And for me personally, there's the element that in the real world women have to exert more effort to get to the same positions as men (mostly due to our social structures), so it's subconsciously more compelling to see strong, intelligent, and all around powerful women getting things done in media, whether it's for good or ill.  Usually it's less about there being a substantial difference between genders in the game and more our perception of gender in the real world.

Two would be the romance options.  Which...  Well, on one hand for FemShep you have real stinkers like Kaiden Onasi the Whiner and Jakob the Cheater, but then on the other hand you still get Liara and also the undeniably likable right-hand man Garrus.  But this is totally subjective, so folks might like some of the options I bashed and they might not like the options you have if you do the MaleShep route.

Third is gender association.  Boys wanting to play as boys and girls wanting to play as girls, or the inverse of this.  I fit into the latter category for reasons I already stated.

Four is design.  Of course Shepard is a customizable character, and I honestly like how all my customized Shepards looked.  But some like FemShep's design more.

And I'd say five is that sometimes the few differences in dialogue do make a difference.  For example, male Corrin has a different support tree with Forrest than female Corrin, and I dislike the male version of that much more than the female version of it.  I can't think of many dialogue differences off the top of my head between MaleShep and FemShep, but these little differences can leave a real impression.

1 hour ago, lez_rhajat said:

I love dating and S supports. I want that in the new game but without children units. That plot made very little sense in Fates. But I love the human element of supports and relationship building. This would be the best of both worlds.

Yeah, I think they could take a break from 2nd Gen mechanics, honestly.

And if they absolutely have to put them in, they should do their utmost to avoid the Fates approach.

[Shrimpica]

2 minutes ago, Ertrick36 said:

I personally wouldn't mind if they did the latter in the form of a character similar to Julius in Genealogy.  Though that may just be my bias for Genealogy's story-telling speaking.  I know that approach also resulted in the awful main antagonists we got in Fates.

Please no. I really hated Julius and think he is a pretty awful antagonist, only barely better then Anankos. 

Just move away from the whole dragon/dragon-controlled/dragon possesed thing please.

1 hour ago, lez_rhajat said:

I love dating and S supports. I want that in the new game but without children units. That plot made very little sense in Fates. But I love the human element of supports and relationship building. This would be the best of both worlds.

Relationship building shouldn't come at the cost of the Story & characters. I am fine with S-Supports, however don't let everyone romance everyone, and especially don't let the Avatar romance everyone, or the whole world would just revolve around him, which is bleh.

 

 

[lez_rhajat]

12 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

Relationship building shouldn't come at the cost of the Story & characters. I am fine with S-Supports, however don't let everyone romance everyone, and especially don't let the Avatar romance everyone, or the whole world would just revolve around him, which is bleh.

Yes, no game element should be detrimental to the rest of the game. As much as I loved Fates, allowing for all chars to support pretty much all chars made little sense. EDIT: Also, more gay options if there are relationships.

Edited February 13, 2019 by lez_rhajat

[Ertrick36]

21 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

Just move away from the whole dragon/dragon-controlled/dragon possesed thing please.

Given some of the imagery we have so far, I'm willing to bet we're getting dragons again, so I have a strong feeling it's gonna be a case of picking your poison.

25 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

Relationship building shouldn't come at the cost of the Story & characters. I am fine with S-Supports, however don't let everyone romance everyone, and especially don't let the Avatar romance everyone, or the whole world would just revolve around him, which is bleh.

I don't think it took anything away from Robin or any of the characters in Awakening, nor did it make the world revolve around Robin.  I've said this before, but I think Awakening is the one game that handled the playable avatar the best.  Robin's the kind of character I could actually see getting with anyone.

That being said, other characters should have fewer romance options.  Because honestly, Subaki x Setsuna and Oboro x Niles are just pairings that make no sense whatsoever.

[Ottservia]

4 hours ago, Thane said:

If I were to make a not particularly serious wish, I hope Edelgard will be overbearing and conspiratorial. I fully expect another "sweet but naïve noblewoman who'll fight if she has to", but I want more of this and this. Oh, and this.

I want a tsundere female lord as well

Anyway enough about my masochism, All I need from this direct is joker gameplay, indepth three houses info, and maybe a pokemon teaser. Also I hope to god we get a full version of that song from the fist trailer. I NEED that

40 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

Relationship building shouldn't come at the cost of the Story & characters. I am fine with S-Supports, however don't let everyone romance everyone, and especially don't let the Avatar romance everyone, or the whole world would just revolve around him, which is bleh.

Agreed with the part of everyone not romancing everyone. Disagree with the avatar not being able to romance everyone(well without good reason anyway). I'm with Etrick on this one. If you're going to include romance options for a playable avatar, you might as well let them marry everyone unless there is VERY good reason not to(I.E the character is already married, the character is your avatar's sibling(blood related or no), marrying the character would detract from the themes of the story). Cause unless it is for those reasons, you're just needlessly limiting the player. I mean what if the romance options available are not my liking or that guy's liking, or your liking well too bad! You can't marry you're waifu cause we didn't want to write that many supports so you're stuck with these lameos! You get what I'm trying to say here?

Edited February 13, 2019 by Ottservia

[Acacia Sgt]

I suppose if I have any other guess or expection outside possible Mana news... it's perhaps seeing in the Japanese version of the direct something about SRW T. I wouldn't have my hopes up, but I'd welcome if there's anything.

[Shrimpica]

32 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

I mean what if the romance options available are not my liking or that guy's liking, or your liking well too bad! You can't marry you're waifu cause we didn't want to write that many supports so you're stuck with these lameos! You get what I'm trying to say here?

I get what you are saying, but at the same time, why can't other characters have their own romances as well? Or Why does everyone have to be romanceable by the MC/Avatar? Why isn't there an ally character that can't stand you, for example? 

There should be more exceptions then just a few ones, tbh. Sometimes, less is more.

Edited February 13, 2019 by Shrimperor

[Anacybele]

GameXplain has some interesting predictions/discussion. But they don't think Luigi's Mansion will appear because "it'll probably come out later in the year"?! That is just factually wrong, it was confirmed for spring! And considering that we've only gotten one trailer for it so far and how long they're going between Directs lately...yeah. Luigi's Mansion 3 has a high chance imo.

[Ottservia]

3 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

I get what you are saying, but at the same time, why can't other characters have their own romances as well? Or Why does everyone have to be romanceable by the MC/Avatar? Why isn't there an ally character that can't stand you, for example? 

There should be more exceptions then just a few ones, tbh.

first question: They can and as I said that is a valid reason to for a character to not romancable by the avatar. Cause y'know they kind of already got a love thing going on with another character so it just doesn't work.

Second question: It's a matter of restricting options to the player as I said. I mean why not let the player marry everyone. Other than the ones I listed, there really is no good reason to restrict the player's options like that. At that point you shouldn't include being able to romance your waifu as an option to begin with. Again it's just a needless restriction. It's either you go big or you go home. Doing anything else feels like you're half-assing it.

Last question: This one is a little hard to explain but I'll try my best. The avatar is an extension of the player. They are your window into the game's world and story. In a way it's blatant wish-fulfillment. and you know people don't like people who are assholes to them(unless you're a weirdo like me anyway). Like you know put yourself in the game you kind of expect people to like you because you want people to like you. If that makes sense. I mean you're the player why shouldn't people like you. You play the game. You do a thing so people should like you for it. Again it's kind of hard to explain but I hope you understood that.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

14 minutes ago, Anacybele said:

GameXplain has some interesting predictions/discussion. But they don't think Luigi's Mansion will appear because "it'll probably come out later in the year"?! That is just factually wrong, it was confirmed for spring! And considering that we've only gotten one trailer for it so far and how long they're going between Directs lately...yeah. Luigi's Mansion 3 has a high chance imo.

I'm afraid Luigi's Mansion has no specified release window. Just that it's coming out in 2019. 

I am intrigued at their predictions for Square Enix stuff. I am reminded that it was the last general direct where they finally and suddenly announced a ton of ports for Switch, and I've had a hankering for some FF9 lately.

[Anacybele]

7 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

I'm afraid Luigi's Mansion has no specified release window. Just that it's coming out in 2019. 

Wrong. The trailer said spring 2019.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

1 minute ago, Anacybele said:

Wrong. The trailer said spring 2019.

It does not

 

[Anacybele]

Just now, Glennstavos said:

It does not

 

I just looked myself, you're right. But I still think it has a high chance of appearing since it's a Switch game and we've only gotten this one teaser trailer.

[Fire Emblem Fan]

FINALLY! This is awesome! I'm pumped to hear about Three Houses, and I'm hoping to maybe hear about more FE amiibo...maybe Lyn...maybe. ANYWAY I also really wanna hear about Luigi's Mansion 3, I feel like it's time we got more of a look at that.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

1 minute ago, Anacybele said:

I just looked myself, you're right. But I still think it has a high chance of appearing since it's a Switch game and we've only gotten this one teaser trailer.

Can't argue with that. I'm expecting May to July myself, and the big Switch game that's a no show for this Direct will be Animal Crossing. I'm always under the impression that Mario games are made months in advance and held strategically to release during slow parts of Nintendo's release schedule since they tend to sell well no matter what happens. Maybe Fire Emblem is slated for those months, but we just don't know what's going on with that game at the moment.

[Anacybele]

18 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

Can't argue with that. I'm expecting May to July myself, and the big Switch game that's a no show for this Direct will be Animal Crossing. I'm always under the impression that Mario games are made months in advance and held strategically to release during slow parts of Nintendo's release schedule since they tend to sell well no matter what happens. Maybe Fire Emblem is slated for those months, but we just don't know what's going on with that game at the moment.

Yeah, that works. Especially if it is May and it's near my birthday! May 5 is a Sunday this year, but that means May 3 could be the day since it's a Friday. And Nintendo games release on Friday here all the time.

[GrandeRampel]

8 hours ago, Shrimperor said:

I get what you are saying, but at the same time, why can't other characters have their own romances as well? Or Why does everyone have to be romanceable by the MC/Avatar? Why isn't there an ally character that can't stand you, for example? 

There should be more exceptions then just a few ones, tbh. Sometimes, less is more.

I get what you're saying, but honestly I hope that if they change a thing about how you were able to romance everyone in Fates, I want them to change the gay characters. Like, just let them be gay.

I know Bi people are cool and all, but sometimes it feels kind of lazy. Also, you get to write 1 less support, because the character is only available for 1 gender of your avatar, instead of two.

Also, please no more Catria/Cordelia/Faye. I know they are realistic because IRL people often get rejected and can't realize their romantic dreams, but good Naga are those characters depressing. I wanted to have an avatar character in Echoes just to give Faye a hug. Why do they make characters that will always be unhappy? Make them more like Oboro.

I know technically Titania is the Catria of Tellius, since she loved only one man, who married someone else, but in that case the plot worked in her favor and she could move on instead of always being chained by her feelings like the other Catrias. That made her way more bearable.

Also to the people who don't want a dragon as the final boss, I agree but to compensate, let's have a f*ckton of playable dragons. Like, Radiant Dawn Endgame/Awakening levels. Dragons are an amazing class, and after Heroes allowing me to play only with dragons if I want to... I don't think I can go back to PoR and the GBA with only 1 playable dragon. And please let's not go back to Jugdral and 0 dragons. LET'S NOT!

[Ertrick36]

1 hour ago, GrandeRampel said:

Why do they make characters that will always be unhappy? Make them more like Oboro.

As the resident 'Boro fan, I approve this message ヽﾉ

1 hour ago, GrandeRampel said:

Also to the people who don't want a dragon as the final boss, I agree but to compensate, let's have a f*ckton of playable dragons. Like, Radiant Dawn Endgame/Awakening levels. Dragons are an amazing class, and after Heroes allowing me to play only with dragons if I want to... I don't think I can go back to PoR and the GBA with only 1 playable dragon. And please let's not go back to Jugdral and 0 dragons. LET'S NOT!

Okay, I like Jugdral, but I'd absolutely be down with manaketes being a normalized race.

How many Fire Emblem games can you count where there's maybe two or three playable manaketes at most?  It's time for a change of pace, and it's time they finally take full advantage of this race and its potential.  I mean come on, if they're worried about diversity, Mystery of the Emblem alone had seven different types of dragons in total.  That's plenty.  And there's just so much else they could do with manaketes, it's really a shame they've never been normalized in a FE game before.

1 hour ago, GrandeRampel said:

I know Bi people are cool and all, but sometimes it feels kind of lazy.

Have you ever played Dragon's Dogma?

That game practically wrote the book on lazy romance writing.  No matter what gender you are, you can literally become the lover of anyone in that game so long as they're a quest giver that you can give gifts to.

But really though, I wish there were some exclusively gay options.  Soleil is the sorest thumb in this issue, but this could also apply to other characters.  If there's one thing I will give Bioware credit for in ME3, it's them giving you new potential partners who are exclusively gay.  Granted, there were only one for each gender, but still.  I can't believe I and a few others have kept up with all these mentions of Mass Effect for this long.

[Etrurian emperor]

10 hours ago, Ottservia said:

Last question: This one is a little hard to explain but I'll try my best. The avatar is an extension of the player. They are your window into the game's world and story. In a way it's blatant wish-fulfillment. and you know people don't like people who are assholes to them(unless you're a weirdo like me anyway). Like you know put yourself in the game you kind of expect people to like you because you want people to like you. If that makes sense. I mean you're the player why shouldn't people like you. You play the game. You do a thing so people should like you for it. Again it's kind of hard to explain but I hope you understood that.

I think Fates demonstrated that this philosophy doesn't really work out. A good half of all Fates story problems stem from the writers being frightened of criticizing anything the player avatar says or does. When combined with Corrin's naive personality this resulted in a main character that was both heavily flawed while simultaneously cuddled and adored by the playable cast. Corrin's naivety is a character flaw but he's not allowed to grow out of it because Fates insist Corrin doesn't have any flaws, because he and the player are perfect as they are. The idea of Corrin needing to change is even shot down by other characters. No matter what happened there was always someone who said Corrin did a fantastic job or was blameless of things that went wrong. Corrin would likely have been far less divisive if this wasn't the case.

And Corrin isn't the only victim of the need for the player avatar to be perfect. Kotaro is clumsily written to betray Nohr for no reason so he can be killed and the player avatar is spared from having to endure a shady ally and Takumi is made to admit he was wrong to distrust Corrin....even if he wasn't. 

Its a matter of wants vs needs. The player might want their avatar to be adored by everyone but usually its not what the story needs. A main character who faces no opposition and has no rival or person who doesn't like him, and who isn't allowed to grow usually isn't very interesting. 

10 hours ago, Ottservia said:

first question: They can and as I said that is a valid reason to for a character to not romancable by the avatar. Cause y'know they kind of already got a love thing going on with another character so it just doesn't work.

I feel like I'm harping on Fates too much but like before Fates does show that this philosophy carries big problems.  What constitutes as a ''valid reason'' is a bit of a murky area. Fates had lots of instances where there was a valid reason for characters not to end up with Corrin. Percy and Elise are clearly underage while Fuga is several decades older than Corrin, Gunther isn't just several decades older than Corrin but is also the closest thing she has to a dad. All of them can spread their legs for Corrin and deliver him/her a baby. The most damning instance was with the Hoshido siblings where a valid reason not to romance them was removed explicitly so you could safely romance them. So as it turns out a lot of valid reasons not to have your avatar romance a certain character don't have to be deal breakers which in turn can get very awkward or even damaging. Its wants vs needs again. Players might have really wanted their avatars to romance the Hoshido siblings but the plot desperately needed it not to be possible. 

There are also several grey areas as far as established pairings are concerned. What of two characters like Mae and Boey? They may end up as a couple but they don't start out as one. Would this be used as a justification to allow the avatar to intrude on the pairing if they S rank one of them fast enough? What of a couple like Est and Able that breaks up? Would the Est leave the Abel for the avatar character if they have an S rank?

I think having some strict limits on who the Avatar can romance might be very beneficial for everyone. It would remove some very awkward pairings from the pool while freeing several characters from the limitations of having to potential marry an avatar. A couple in the making like Mae x Boey, or an established couple like Pent and Louise or characters unavailable for the avatar due to their very young or old age can coexist with an avatar romance system.  I think new Mystery did it pretty well. Gordin was single and in the general age range of the Avatar so he was a potential romance option while older characters, kids like Yubello or characters already in a relation were not. 

Edited February 13, 2019 by Etrurian emperor

[Michelaar]

As for the whole avatar romance thing, I feel like Stardew Valley does this pretty much perfect, you have a set amount of bachelors/bachelorette's, which you can date, marry and move in with etc. It also doesn't feel like they constantly praise your avatar at all. For example. the lady in my avatar (Haley) is not very nice to you when you first meet her.

[NegativeExponents-]

1 hour ago, Etrurian emperor said:

What of a couple like Est and Able that breaks up? Would the Est leave the Abel for the avatar character if they have an S rank?

I don’t know about the Boey and Mae example but as far as Est and Abel go, if a couple breaks up then they’re not a couple anymore. Kinda the whole point of breaking up. So I don’t see the issue with Est leaving with the Avatar. Being able to romance Abel would be the real issue since doesn’t he end up horribly distraught over Est leaving and ends up spending the rest of his days looking for her or something like that? (I’m going off second-hand info so sorry if I got something wrong)

Anyway, I think the whole romance thing with the Avatar should simply be handled by working on every other characters relationships first and then just give the leftovers who don’t end up with anyone to the Avatar.

4 minutes ago, Michelaar said:

As for the whole avatar romance thing, I feel like Stardew Valley does this pretty much perfect, you have a set amount of bachelors/bachelorette's, which you can date, marry and move in with etc. It also doesn't feel like they constantly praise your avatar at all. For example. the lady in my avatar (Haley) is not very nice to you when you first meet her.

...or this. Take the Stardew Valley/Harvest Moon approach and have a predefined set of characters that are romanceable by the Avatar. Makes it easier to not f up on the romance when you don’t have to include everyone and can just dedicate everything to a few people.

[Ertrick36]

22 minutes ago, Michelaar said:

As for the whole avatar romance thing, I feel like Stardew Valley

Lemme guess from your recent change in avatar, you've been digging into the game lately?  First time or returning to it after a break?

Shane's also a complete dick to you when you first meet him, you have to actively pursue him to get a "better side" of him.

Most everyone else just treats you like a neighbor they don't know very well, at least until you actually befriend them a bit (either through simply greeting them a lot or giving them gifts frequently).  It's basically the feeling of moving into a small town with a tight-knit community, which is rather funny considering the community center in that game starts off in complete shambles, on the brink of being sold to the Walmart of that world.

Overall, I approve of how relationships are handled in that game.